Back
1996 Supreme(SC) 19
1996(1) Supreme 357
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy & G.B. Pattanaik, JJ
Rajbir Singh, HFS-II -Appellant
versus
The State of Haryana & Anr.
-Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1530 of 1996
Decided on 4-1-1996
IMPORTANT POINT
When dispute is about seniority inter se the appellant & another, the Supreme Court cannot look into unless that another was also a party respondent in the W.P. in the High Court.
Headnote:Constitution of India-Article 136-Special Leave Appeal-Main argument on inter se seniority between appellant and one Mr. M.P. Sharma-M.P. Sharma not made party in these proceedings-No opinion thus expressed on merits-Appeal dismissed with leave to file fresh W.P. impleading the affected parties and seek remedy according to law. (Para 3)
ORDER
Application for impleading is dismissed as withdrawn.
2. Leave granted.
3. We decline to express any opinion on merits since M.P. Sharma, who was appointed to an additional post as a general candidate pursuant to the direction issued by the High Court in Writ Petition No. 13700/90, on July 8, 1990 while the appellant was regularly selected by the Public Service Commission and appointed earlier to him, is not made a party to these proceedings. The main thrust of the argument is on inter se seniority between the appellant and M.P. Sharma. But in the absence of M.P. Sharma being impleaded as a party respondent to these proceedings, we cannot be into the question. Under these circumstances, we do find that though the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition in limine, it would be open to the appellant to approach the High Court, if so advised, to file a fresh writ petition impleading the affected parties and seek his remedy according to law.
4. The appeal is dismissed accordingly. No costs.
Appeal dismissed accordingly.
*******
